Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity

Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity / 2019 / Article
Special Issue

Oxidative Stress, Chronic Inflammation, and Amyloidoses

View this Special Issue

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2019 |Article ID 7935310 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/7935310

Matteo A. Russo, Carlo Tomino, Enza Vernucci, Federica Limana, Luigi Sansone, Andrea Frustaci, Marco Tafani, "Hypoxia and Inflammation as a Consequence of β-Fibril Accumulation: A Perspective View for New Potential Therapeutic Targets", Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, vol. 2019, Article ID 7935310, 10 pages, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/7935310

Hypoxia and Inflammation as a Consequence of β-Fibril Accumulation: A Perspective View for New Potential Therapeutic Targets

Guest Editor: Arkadiusz Orzechowski
Received14 Mar 2019
Accepted22 May 2019
Published26 Jun 2019


Amyloidoses are heterogeneous diseases that result from the deposition of toxic insoluble β-sheet fibrillar protein aggregates in different tissues. The cascade of molecular events leading to amyloidoses and to the related clinical manifestations is not completely understood. Nevertheless, it is known that tissue damage associated to this disease involves alteration of tissue architecture, interaction with cell surface receptors, inflammation elicited by the amyloid protein deposition, oxidative stress, and apoptosis. However, another important aspect to consider is that systemic protein massive deposition not only subverts tissue architecture but also determines a progressive cellular hypertrophy and dilation of the extracellular space enlarging the volume of the organ. Such an alteration increases the distance between cells and vessels with a drop in pO2 that, in turn, causes both necrotic cell death and activation of the hypoxia transcription factor HIF-1α. Herewith, we propose the hypothesis that both cell death and hypoxia represent two important events for the pathogenesis of damage and progression of amyloidoses. In fact, molecules released by necrotic cells activate inflammatory cells from one side while binding to HIF-1α-dependent membrane receptors expressed on hypoxic parenchymal cells on the other side. This latter event generates a signaling cascade triggering NFκB activation and chronic inflammation. Finally, we also suggest that this scenario, once proved and detailed, might suggest important targets for new therapeutic interventions.

1. Introduction

Amyloidoses are a group of heterogeneous diseases presenting many common molecular, cellular, and clinical features strictly associated to a shared pathogenetic mechanism of the tissue/organ damage [1].

Although the available clinical descriptions and studies of different amyloidoses are numerous and several studies have detailed the molecular characteristics of the proteins and their aggregates in the disease, the precise molecular pathogenetic mechanism that leads to the tissue damage is still incomplete and debated [2].

Recently, a number of authors have suggested an important role for inflammation, both as a trigger of amyloidoses and as a consequence of the β-fibril formation and accumulation [3, 4]. In addition, inflammation has been identified as an independent negative prognostic factor for clinical progression and severity [57]. However, very few studies have considered and explored the hypothesis that hypoxia, due to β-fibril accumulation, might represent an important pathogenetic factor by favoring the inflammatory-reparative response (IRR) and the consequent cellular damage [3, 4, 8].

The main focus of this short perspective review is to highlight the early and substantial role of hypoxia and hypoxia-triggered inflammation in producing tissue damage observed in the progressive advanced amyloidoses.

2. Molecular Features of Amyloidoses

A constant feature of amyloidoses is the progressive accumulation of β-fibrils in the intra- and extracellular space of involved tissues and organs as reported in Figure 1.

In particular, β-fibrils can also accumulate in the blood plasma. We have termed such an accumulation as “clonal diseases.” In fact, “clonal diseases” are pathologic human conditions characterized by proliferation of a single cell lineage, mostly referred to disorders of the immunohematologic diseases, such as plasmocytoma/multiple myeloma [911]. In this case, patients typically present with bone marrow infiltration of clonal plasma cells and monoclonal protein in the serum and/or urine. Occasionally, when polymers are more than one, “clonal peaks” may be more than one. Clinical pathologists refer to clonal diseases (maybe inexactly) when abnormal “clonal” peaks are evidenced in serum protein electrophoretic trace, for instance, when abnormal production of a single protein occurs (liver, kidney, producing adenomas, etc.). In the case of β-fibrilloses, the “abnormal clonal peak” may be evidenced in the serum and/or urine not only in the case of plasma cell disorders but also in other conditions in which abnormal production of a single protein can give rise to β-fibrils [11].

Nevertheless, β-fibrils can also accumulate intracellularly in various cell compartments (Figure 1) [1].

β-Fibrils are polymers of β-sheet-rich proteins, which in normal conditions and conformation accomplish specific cell functions. Upon mutations or abnormal posttranslational modifications, they undergo misfolding, polymerization, loss of function, and possibly, acquisition of toxicity [12].

Initial protofibrils are small polymers of antiparallel β-sheet-rich misfolded proteins. Larger polymers are linear, rigid, and nonbranching, with an 8-12 nm diameter, easily detectable under a transmission electron microscope (TEM) (Figure 1) [1, 2, 12]. β-Fibrils exhibit a green birefringence at polarized light under an optical microscope after red Congo staining and more importantly a strong resistance to proteases that normally provide to their turnover in order to avoid accumulation in cells and tissues [2].

β-Fibrils are heterogeneous in their origin, localization, and composition, depending on the involved proteins (Table 1).

Molecular featuresDescription and mechanismsReferences

Misfolded proteinsMisfolding of β-sheet-rich proteins, such as amyloid β-protein tau, tau, α-synuclein, and prion protein (PrPsc)[1, 24]
Polymers/protofibrilsFormation of intra/extracellular polymers with antiparallel β-sheet-rich proteins or protofibrils[69]
β-Fibrils at optical microscopy (OM)β-Fibrils show green birefringence at polarized OM after red Congo staining[2]
β-Fibrils at TEMβ-Fibrils are linear, 8-12 nm in diameter, and interact with EM extracellular matrix molecules[1, 2, 12]
β-Fibril physicochemistryLinear, rigid, nonbranching, and protease-resistant polymers, probably interacting with extracellular matrix proteins[12, 70]
β-Fibril protein compositionβ-Fibril proteins are heterogeneous in their origin and composition, depending on the cell type involved[12]
β-Fibril passing in the bloodβ-Fibrils associate with SAP (serum amyloid protein)[1, 2]
Large aggregates and deposits of β-fibrilsFormations of aggregates and deposits of rigid, stable, and protease-resistant β-fibrils, containing 15% of SAP, localized in the extracellular space, mostly around the vessel[71]

Fibrillar aggregates can be found in different subcellular compartments (Figure 1) or in extracellular space (Figure 2), where they can be easily detected because of their birefringence. Intracellular β-fibrils are also detectable by TEM as cytosolic bundles or aggregates in Alzheimer’s disease (such as tau protein tangles) (Figure 1(a)), Parkinson’s disease frontotemporal dementia, and dementia with Lewy bodies (α-synuclein and tau protein) and as nuclear aggregates, in Huntington’s disease and other polyglutamine expansion diseases [1, 13]. Occasionally, β-fibrils can be observed in other subcellular compartments such as mitochondria, autophagosomes, and cisternae of the endoplasmic reticulum (Figure 1(b)) [14, 15]. The localization in the cisternae of the endoplasmic reticulum is more frequent in systemic amyloidosis where misfolded and polymerized proteins accumulate in producing cell, such as B lymphocyte/plasma cell (antibody light chain), pancreatic islet β-cell (insulin), and atrial myocardiocyte (ANF or atrial natriuretic factor) (Figure 3) [16].

Interestingly, sometimes, secretion of β-fibrils can be observed at the secretory pole of the cell producing the involved protein. Intracellular β-fibrils are able to activate various pathways of oxidative metabolism with production of ROS which contribute substantially to the cell damage.

The misfolded proteins, once accumulated outside the cell, can become resident in the extracellular space (Figure 1(c)), probably fixed by some interaction with common domains of various components of the extracellular matrix. In particular, this interaction may involve glycosaminoglycan- (GAG-) rich components, such as fibrillar (collagens, elastin, laminins, and fibronectins) and nonfibrillar glycoproteins (proteoglycans, hyaluronans) [17]. In alternative, misfolded proteins or their polymers can reach the circulation by entering the vessel lumen. This latter situation has two consequences: (a) the protein can be evidenced as clonal peak in serum protein electrophoretic trace and (b) it can infiltrate and deposit in the extracellular space in distant organs and tissues.

Interestingly, in the first case, proteins and their polymers can be appropriately measured for diagnosis and disease monitoring [18]. Moreover, in systemic amyloidoses, 15% of amyloidosic substance is constituted by SAP or serum amyloid protein, a member of the major acute-phase protein family, i.e., pentraxins, which strongly interacts with β-fibrils, probably through chemical patterns usually recognized by pentraxins. This interaction may protect β-aggregates from proteolysis on one side and stimulate their phagocytosis by macrophages on the other side (Figure 1) [19, 20].

3. Clinical Features of Amyloidoses

Amyloidosis can be familial or acquired. In the first case, numerous mutations of the involved proteins have been described, strictly influencing the misfolding, the instability, and the propensity to form β-fibrils [2]. Acquired amyloidosis is generally secondary to conditions presenting abnormal/prolonged production and secondary misfolding of involved protein. Typical examples are represented by the excessive production of Ig light chain (lambda or kappa) by a transformed clone of lymphocyte/plasma cell and by the abnormal production of acute-phase proteins such as Serum amyloid A (SAA) or transthyretin in chronic inflammatory diseases and ageing [1, 2, 21].

β-Fibrillosis can be localized or systemic. Localized or organ-limited amyloidoses accumulate, both intracellularly and in the extracellular space, polymers of specific proteins such as β-amyloid (neurons in Alzheimer’s disease), atrial natriuretic factor (in atrial myocardiocytes), procalcitonin (transformed medullary thyroid cells), and amylin (in pancreatic islet cells). Systemic amyloidoses are characterized by the deposition of culprit proteins such as immunoglobulin light chains (intact or fragments) and many acute-phase proteins (SAA, transthyretin, fibrinogen α-chain, β2-macroglobulin, lysozyme, and gelsolin) [1, 21]. Upon entering the vessels, culprit proteins and their polymers may be evidenced in the electrophoretic diagram of blood plasma as a narrow high peak or by different bands when polymers of different MW are present. After leaving the blood, β-fibrils accumulate in the extracellular space of distant organs (liver, kidney, myocardium, lungs, brain, etc.), such as primary systemic amyloidosis (Ig light chains monomers and polymers or macroglobulins) and senile systemic amyloidosis (nonmutated transthyretin monomers), triggering the variable clinical features, typical of systemic amyloidoses [22].

β-Fibrilloses are progressive diseases in relation to the rate of accumulation of β-aggregates and to the severity of specific organ dysfunctions, as it occurs in Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease, in myocardial amyloidosis by transthyretin and in kidney amyloidosis in the course of primary systemic amyloidosis [13, 2325].

“False hypertrophy” of the involved organ/tissue, as evaluated by imaging, may be the first clinical sign for a diagnosis of amyloidosis [23]. β-Fibrils accumulate in the parenchyma of large organs, including the liver, kidneys, lungs, myocardium, skeletal muscle, intestine, and brain, progressively subverting their architecture and function [26, 27]. Typically, tissues show enlarged extracellular spaces, occupied by the amyloid substance (apparently amorphous and similar to the starch) (Figure 2(a)), which, as said, under optical microscope (OM) exhibits a green birefringence at polarized light after red Congo staining while under TEM appears composed of β-fibrils, 8-12 nm in diameter (Figure 3(b)) (Tables 1 and 2).

Clinical featuresDescription and mechanismsReferences

FamilialMutations of the involved protein, strictly influencing misfolding and conformational instability, such as transthyretin in familial amyloidosic polyneuropathy[72]
AcquiredConditions presenting abnormal/toxic production and posttransductional misfolding of culprit proteins, such as plasmocytoma (light chains) or chronic inflammatory diseases (SAA) or haemodialysis-related amyloidosis (β2-microglobulin)[1, 73]
LocalizedOrgan-limited amyloidosis in which β-fibrils and polymers may became resident, almost stably, in the extracellular space around the cells producing the misfolded protein (see text)[1]
SystemicBulk production and secretion of culprit protein in the extracellular space; protein entering the vessel lumen may be evidenced in blood plasma by a typical electrophoretic peak; accumulation in the extracellular space of distant tissues around the organism (liver, kidney, myocardium, lungs, brain, etc.), such as primary systemic amyloidosis (Ig light chains) and senile systemic amyloidosis (nonmutated transthyretin)[1]
ProgressiveThe rate of amyloid accumulation depends not only on the rate of synthesis and on insensitivity to the extracellular proteases but also on the early start and duration length of disease.[13, 2325]
False hypertrophyBoth producing cells and accumulating tissues/organs increase their volume at various sizes, depending on the degree of progression.[23, 74]
Systemic inflammationA low-degree inflammation is constantly present in a patient bearing amyloidosis. Its intensity level is determined by the strength of the activation mechanisms (see text) and by the nature of the involved protein.[5, 23, 75]
HypoxiaThere are a few specific studies demonstrating that the space accumulating the amyloid substance is actually hypoxic. However, an accurate evaluation of the distance between the vessels and the peripheral parenchymal cells shows that frequently this is larger than 200 μm, which is the diffusion limit of gas such as oxygen and carbon dioxide.[3, 76]

3.1. Hypoxic Microenvironment Generation

In tissues accumulating β-aggregates, the distance between vessels and parenchymal cells progressively increases above 200 μm representing the physical limit for an efficient gas diffusion and exchange (oxygen from blood and carbon dioxide from cells) [3]. As a consequence, in this area, a hypoxic environment is generated, leading to HIF-1α activation that is accompanied by NFκB activation. Importantly, both HIF-1α and NFκB trigger and amplify the inflammatory-reparative response and cellular damage [28].

3.2. Consequences of HIF-1α/NFκB Axis Activation
3.2.1. Hypoxic Cell Damage and Cell Adaptation to Hypoxia

Acute hypoxia causes cell death. O2 shortage causes inhibition of ATP production, rapid fall of the energy charge, and loss of ionic gradients with the alteration of cytosolic calcium homeostasis [29]. The increase of cytosolic Ca++ concentration above 10-6 M dramatically activates the peroxidative metabolism, an irreversible contraction and degradation of the cytoskeleton and the activation of Ca++-dependent cytosolic proteases (calpains) and DNAases, leading to an irreversible and rapid cell degradation [30]. Upon plasma membrane rupture, there is a release of intracellularly segregated molecules, many of which are called alarmins for their ability to signal the cell damage to specific receptors on adjacent cells [31]. Obviously, necrosis is more evident in the regions more distant from tissue vessels, where pO2 reaches the lowest levels.

In chronic mild hypoxia, most cells (especially less differentiated cells and stem cells) are able to survive adapting their phenotype to the low pO2 [3]. This adaptation to hypoxia occurs through the activation of hypoxic inducible factors (HIFs) [32] and the expression of a number of HIF-1α-dependent genes, involved in vital pathways, such as angiogenesis (vascular endothelial growth factors or VEGFs), metabolism (glucose transporter 1 or Glut1, hexokinase II or HKII, and glycolysis) [33], inflammation (Toll-like receptors or TLRs and other receptors for alarmins, cytokines, and matrix metalloproteinases or MMPs), and repair (autophagocytosis for disposal of damaged cell components, telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT), and stemness genes to increase the stem cell compartment to substitute death cells) [34], transforming growth factor β (TGF-β) and fibrosis pathways [33].

3.2.2. Amplification and Maintenance of a Chronic IRR in Amyloidosic/Hypoxic Microenvironment

The importance of the unconventional expression of receptors for alarmins must be underlined, directly in parenchymal cells (probably less differentiated and resident stem cells) [35] which allows the acquisition of the proinflammatory phenotype in nonleukocytic (CD45-) cells, such as neurons, astrocytes, neuroglia, epithelial cells, and muscle cells [7]. Unconventionally, these cells express receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE), purinergic type 2 X7 (P2X7), Toll-like receptors, nucleotide oligomerization domain-like (NOD-like) receptors, inflammasomes, etc. [5], normally abundantly observed in activated leukocytes and endothelial cells.

As a consequence, alarmins released by necrotic cells (β-fibrils, high-mobility group box 1 or HMGB1, ATP/ADP, membrane debris, nucleic acids, etc.) bind to these newly expressed receptors producing an additional activation of transcription factors (NFκB, STAT3, AP1, etc.) driving IRR gene transcription not only in resident inflammatory cells but also in remodeled parenchymal cells [26, 27]. The latter further activate oxidative metabolism, produce mediators and other proinflammatory cytokines, and maintain a chronic inflammatory status in the affected tissue. Unfortunately, clinical consequences of this prolonged IRR activation include cell/tissue damage, continuous repair and fibrosis with progressive deterioration of the function leading to organ insufficiency, and neuronal damages, the typical final outcome of amyloidoses [5, 7, 36].

4. Mechanism of Tissue Damage

A number of different mechanisms contribute to the damage of affected tissue. However, they can all be included in three categories: (a) direct toxicity of β-fibrils, (b) structural damage and phenotype remodeling produced by the progressive growth of β-aggregates, and (c) activation of natural immunity or inflammatory response, ROS production, cell damage, chronic repair, fibrosis, and functional insufficiency.

Although a general consensus on these categories is present, a number of questions are still unresolved.

(a) Direct Toxicity of β-Fibrils. The chemical patterns of β-fibrils share many characteristics with exogenous pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) or endogenous damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs). Therefore, extracellular β-fibrils may be recognized by alarmin receptors (Toll-like receptors, RAGE, and P2X7) [37, 38] and pentraxin family members such as SAP [39]. Extracellular β-fibril-alarmin receptor binding can then activate NFκB pathways for oxidative metabolism and apoptosis [40, 41] as well as phagocytic activity of macrophages (Figure 1(c)). On the other hand, intracellular β-fibrils are able to activate inflammasomes [42, 43]. Through these mechanisms, inflammation and ROS contribute substantially to the cell/tissue damage and severity of the disease.

(b) Structural Damage and Phenotype Remodeling Associated by the Progressive Growth of β-Aggregates. The progressive accumulation of β-fibrils is mainly due to their insensitivity to proteases that usually dispose of misfolded/aged proteins and their polymers [44, 45]. Although intracellular β-fibrils may undergo autophagocytosis, they still display a clear insensitivity to the intralysosomal acidic proteases, leading to lipofuscin accumulation that can be observed in aged and amyloidosic tissues [46]. An obvious consequence of β-fibril accumulation is the progressive architectural alteration of both cells and tissues with functional loss.

(c) Activation of Inflammatory-Reparative Response. In conclusion, as it has been underlined previously, progressive accumulation of amyloid fibrils is responsible for a local hypoxia and of a chronic long lasting inflammation, which in turn produces tissue damage leading to continuous repair, fibrosis, and organ insufficiency.

4.1. Putative Therapeutic Targets

Amyloidoses have an urgent need for new and effective therapeutic strategies. A better definition of the pathogenetic scenario here presented might suggest more precise and rational targets, changing the present disappointing and malignant outcomes of these diseases.

Three main approaches can be pursued: (a) control the synthesis of misfolded β-sheet-rich proteins and prevent/correct their misfolding; (b) inhibit polymer/fibril formation and accumulation and/or favor their clearance; and (c) inhibit and modulate HIF-1α/NFκB axis activation, limiting or repairing the damage associated to the β-fibrils. Figure 4 summarizes these approaches.

(a) The use of specific microRNA [47, 48] and RNA silencing [49] blocks/reduces the synthesis of the culprit protein and ameliorates mitochondrial respiration, synaptic function, and clinical symptoms. Recently, it has been shown [50] that recombinant APC (activated protein C, a plasma protease) or its analogs, inhibiting the neuronal β-secretase, may strongly slow or block the generation of β-amyloid protein protecting from Alzheimer’s disease or slowing its progression [51, 52]

(b) Using chaperones [53, 54], small molecules [54], and aspirin [55] slows or inhibits polymer formation [50, 55, 56] and β-fibril aggregation and accumulation, preventing the disease and attenuating its progression and symptoms. In cellular and animal models, aspirin has been shown to be highly effective in inhibiting polymer formation and β-fibril aggregation with in vivo reduction of the incidence of Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases. Although the mechanism(s) is still unclear, it has been demonstrated that aspirin is able to donate its acetyl group to the culprit proteins, increasing their acetylation and reducing the tendency of phosphorylation. This appears to be a common mechanism for inhibiting polymer and β-fibril formation in all different β-fibrillosis [55]. Aspirin may, as well, contribute with other beneficial mechanisms, such as inhibition of NFκB and cyclooxygenase, reducing the damaging impact of the inflammatory-reparative response (see below)

(c) Modulating HIF-1α and hypoxia adaptation [3, 4, 53] can represent a new strategy to block or limit the damage in tissues accumulating β-fibrils. A long list of potential HIF-1α inhibitors is now available, such as digoxin, acriflavine, doxorubicin, and chetomin [5759]

(d) The utilization of NFκB inhibitors, anti-inflammatory drugs, and anti-inflammasome agents is aimed at modulating and inhibiting chronic inflammation and ROS production responsible for continuous cell damage, repair, and fibrosis [31, 60]

(e) Microbiota and nutrients may be in many ways involved in the pathogenesis of β-fibrillosis, including neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. Surprisingly, an intense gut-brain cross-talk has been evidenced, suggesting an important therapeutic role of the maintenance of intestinal microbiome equilibrium in preventing neurodegenerative diseases [6163]. As a consequence, natural nutrients [64] such as curcumin and in particular vanillin, a degradation product of curcumin, have been shown to reduce the formation of advanced glycation end products (AGEs) [65]. Therefore, it is conceivable that they may also be used to modify microbiota with the goal to prevent, slow, and ameliorate beta-fibrillosis [64]

(f) Recently, physical exercise has been shown to be able to prevent Alzheimer’s disease and substantially slow its progression. Mechanisms are unclear and controversial, but it seems that endocrine and metabolic effects associated with physical activity may be responsible for these beneficial effects. In particular, the release of survival factors, such as BDGF (neurons), IGF-1 (systemic or organ-specific release), and testosterone, and the activation of survival/repairing pathways, such as sirtuin-dependent transcription factors, are able to reduce apoptosis and to repair abnormal cell components, rescuing sublethally damaged postmitotic cells, such as neurons [66], myocardiocytes, skeletal muscle, and hepatocytes [67]

5. Conclusions

Clinically, amyloidoses are chronic progressive degenerative diseases leading to severe and irreversible insufficiency/failure of the involved organ/tissue. Even if genetic or acquired protein misfolding represents the primary trigger of the disease, during the pathogenetic sequence and progression, other pathophysiological responses are activated that strongly contribute to the damage production [68]. In particular, activation of the HIF-1α/NFκB axis by local hypoxia produces a proinflammatory remodeling of the affected tissue, explaining the final fibrosis and organ/tissue failure. Therefore, hypoxia and inflammation must be taken into consideration as potential targets for more rational and effective therapies aimed not only at preventing the formation and accumulation of β-fibrils and/or at increasing their clearance from deposits but more importantly at blocking/reducing the damage associated with the chronic inflammatory-reparative response.

Conflicts of Interest

No conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, are declared by the authors.


This work was supported by funding of the Italian Ministry of Health (Ricerca corrente) given to IRCCS Spallanzani and IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana. This work was also supported in part by funding from Fondazione Roma given to MEBIC (grants 2016 and 2019).


  1. D. J. Selkoe, “Folding proteins in fatal ways,” Nature, vol. 426, no. 6968, pp. 900–904, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. G. Merlini and V. Bellotti, “Molecular mechanisms of amyloidosis,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 349, no. 6, pp. 583–596, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. N. K. Jha, S. K. Jha, R. Sharma, D. Kumar, R. K. Ambasta, and P. Kumar, “Hypoxia-induced signaling activation in neurodegenerative diseases: targets for new therapeutic strategies,” Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 15–38, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. A. Merelli, J. C. G. Rodríguez, J. Folch, M. R. Regueiro, A. Camins, and A. Lazarowski, “Understanding the role of hypoxia inducible factor during neurodegeneration for new therapeutics opportunities,” Current Neuropharmacology, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 1484–1498, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. C. Matrone, M. Djelloul, G. Taglialatela, and L. Perrone, “Inflammatory risk factors and pathologies promoting Alzheimer’s disease progression: is RAGE the key?” Histology and Histopathology, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 125–139, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. L. Pontano Vaites and J. W. Harper, “Protein aggregates caught stalling,” Nature, vol. 555, no. 7697, pp. 449–451, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. E. E. Tuppo and H. R. Arias, “The role of inflammation in Alzheimer’s disease,” The International Journal of Biochemistry & Cell Biology, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 289–305, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. O. Weinreb, T. Amit, S. Mandel, and M. B. H. Youdim, “Novel therapeutic approach for neurodegenerative pathologies: multitarget iron-chelating drugs regulating hypoxia-inducible factor 1 signal transduction pathway,” Neurodegenerative Diseases, vol. 10, no. 1-4, pp. 112–115, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. S. K. Kumar, V. Rajkumar, R. A. Kyle et al., “Multiple myeloma,” Nature Reviews Disease Primers, vol. 3, no. 1, article 17046, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. C. R. McCudden, R. A. Booth, D. C. C. Lin, A. McCurdy, N. Rupani, and A. Kew, “Synoptic reporting for protein electrophoresis and immunofixation,” Clinical Biochemistry, vol. 51, pp. 21–28, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. P. C. Chana, Y. Chen, E. W. Randell, Monoclonal Gammopathy Interest Group (MGIG), and Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists, “On the path to evidence-based reporting of serum protein electrophoresis patterns in the absence of a discernible monoclonal protein – a critical review of literature and practice suggestions,” Clinical Biochemistry, vol. 51, pp. 29–37, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. C. M. Dobson, “Protein folding and misfolding,” Nature, vol. 426, no. 6968, pp. 884–890, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. M. Kujawska and J. Jodynis-Liebert, “What is the evidence that Parkinson’s disease is a prion disorder, which originates in the gut?” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 19, no. 11, p. 3573, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. E. Area-Gomez, A. de Groof, E. Bonilla et al., “A key role for MAM in mediating mitochondrial dysfunction in Alzheimer disease,” Cell Death & Disease, vol. 9, no. 3, p. 335, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. P. Gómez-Suaga, J. M. Bravo-San Pedro, R. A. González-Polo, J. M. Fuentes, and M. Niso-Santano, “ER-mitochondria signaling in Parkinson’s disease,” Cell Death & Disease, vol. 9, no. 3, p. 337, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. R. Sitia and I. Braakman, “Quality control in the endoplasmic reticulum protein factory,” Nature, vol. 426, no. 6968, pp. 891–894, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. A. D. Theocharis, D. Manou, and N. K. Karamanos, “The extracellular matrix as a multitasking player in disease,” The FEBS Journal, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. T. Scheidt, U. Łapińska, J. R. Kumita et al., “Secondary nucleation and elongation occur at different sites on Alzheimer’s amyloid-β aggregates,” Science Advances, vol. 5, no. 4, article eaau3112, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. L. Rojanathammanee, A. M. Floden, G. D. Manocha, and C. K. Combs, “Attenuation of microglial activation in a mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease via NFAT inhibition,” Journal of Neuroinflammation, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 42, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. K. K. Kopec and R. T. Carroll, “Alzheimer’s beta-amyloid peptide 1-42 induces a phagocytic response in murine microglia,” Journal of Neurochemistry, vol. 71, no. 5, pp. 2123–2131, 1998. View at: Google Scholar
  21. C. C. Quarta, S. D. Solomon, I. Uraizee et al., “Left ventricular structure and function in transthyretin-related versus light-chain cardiac amyloidosis,” Circulation, vol. 129, no. 18, pp. 1840–1849, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. I. G. Halatchev, J. Zheng, and J. Ou, “Wild-type transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTRwt-CA), previously known as senile cardiac amyloidosis: clinical presentation, diagnosis, management and emerging therapies,” Journal of Thoracic Disease, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 2034–2045, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. A. K. Mankad and K. B. Shah, “Transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis,” Current Cardiology Reports, vol. 19, no. 10, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. C. Cerami, L. Iaccarino, and D. Perani, “Molecular imaging of neuroinflammation in neurodegenerative dementias: the role of in vivo PET imaging,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 18, no. 5, p. 993, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. F. E. Cohen and J. W. Kelly, “Therapeutic approaches to protein-misfolding diseases,” Nature, vol. 426, no. 6968, pp. 905–909, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. L. F. Lue, D. G. Walker, L. Brachova et al., “Involvement of microglial receptor for advanced glycation endproducts (RAGE) in Alzheimer’s disease: identification of a cellular activation mechanism,” Experimental Neurology, vol. 171, no. 1, pp. 29–45, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. L. L. Man, F. Liu, Y. J. Wang et al., “The HMGB1 signaling pathway activates the inflammatory response in Schwann cells,” Neural Regeneration Research, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 1706–1712, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. M. Tafani, L. Schito, L. Pellegrini et al., “Hypoxia-increased RAGE and P2X7R expression regulates tumor cell invasion through phosphorylation of Erk1/2 and Akt and nuclear translocation of NF-κB,” Carcinogenesis, vol. 32, no. 8, pp. 1167–1175, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. T. Kristián, “Metabolic stages, mitochondria and calcium in hypoxic/ischemic brain damage,” Cell Calcium, vol. 36, no. 3-4, pp. 221–233, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. M. Tafani, L. Sansone, F. Limana et al., “The interplay of reactive oxygen species, hypoxia, inflammation, and sirtuins in cancer initiation and progression,” Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, vol. 2016, Article ID 3907147, 18 pages, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. M. Tafani, B. Pucci, A. Russo et al., “Modulators of HIF1α and NFkB in cancer treatment: is it a rational approach for controlling malignant progression?” Frontiers in Pharmacology, vol. 4, p. 13, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. M. C. Brahimi-Horn and J. Pouysségur, “Hypoxia in cancer cell metabolism and pH regulation,” Essays in Biochemistry, vol. 43, pp. 165–178, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. G. N. Masoud and W. Li, “HIF-1α pathway: role, regulation and intervention for cancer therapy,” Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 378–389, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. M. Tafani, A. Russo, M. di Vito et al., “Up‐regulation of pro‐inflammatory genes as adaptation to hypoxia in MCF‐7 cells and in human mammary invasive carcinoma microenvironment,” Cancer Science, vol. 101, no. 4, pp. 1014–1023, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. S. R. Mulay, A. Linkermann, and H. J. Anders, “Necroinflammation in kidney disease,” Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 27–39, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. J. W. Kinney, S. M. Bemiller, A. S. Murtishaw, A. M. Leisgang, A. M. Salazar, and B. T. Lamb, “Inflammation as a central mechanism in Alzheimer’s disease,” Alzheimer's & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions, vol. 4, pp. 575–590, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. L. J. Sparvero, D. Asafu-Adjei, R. Kang et al., “RAGE (receptor for advanced glycation endproducts), RAGE ligands, and their role in cancer and inflammation,” Journal of Translational Medicine, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 17, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. F. Di Virgilio, A. L. Giuliani, V. Vultaggio-Poma, S. Falzoni, and A. C. Sarti, “Non-nucleotide agonists triggering P2X7 receptor activation and pore formation,” Frontiers in Pharmacology, vol. 9, p. 39, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. A. Agrawal, P. P. Singh, B. Bottazzi, C. Garlanda, and A. Mantovani, “Pattern recognition by pentraxins,” Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol. 653, p. 98, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  40. D. G. Smith, R. Cappai, and K. J. Barnham, “The redox chemistry of the Alzheimer’s disease amyloid β peptide,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Biomembranes, vol. 1768, no. 8, pp. 1976–1990, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. X. J. Han, Y. Y. Hu, Z. J. Yang et al., “Amyloid β-42 induces neuronal apoptosis by targeting mitochondria,” Molecular Medicine Reports, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 4521–4528, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. A. Halle, V. Hornung, G. C. Petzold et al., “The NALP3 inflammasome is involved in the innate immune response to amyloid-β,” Nature Immunology, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 857–865, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  43. Z. Wu, L. Sun, S. Hashioka et al., “Differential pathways for interleukin-1β production activated by chromogranin A and amyloid β in microglia,” Neurobiology of Aging, vol. 34, no. 12, pp. 2715–2725, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. T. Saido and M. A. Leissring, “Proteolytic degradation of amyloid β-protein,” Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine, vol. 2, no. 6, article a006379, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  45. S. Thellung, A. Corsaro, M. Nizzari, F. Barbieri, and T. Florio, “Autophagy activator drugs: a new opportunity in neuroprotection from misfolded protein toxicity,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 20, no. 4, p. 901, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  46. Y. Kakimoto, C. Okada, N. Kawabe et al., “Myocardial lipofuscin accumulation in ageing and sudden cardiac death,” Scientific Reports, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 3304, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  47. Y. Zhao, V. R. Jaber, A. LeBeauf, N. M. Sharfman, and W. J. Lukiw, “microRNA-34a (miRNA-34a) mediated down-regulation of the post-synaptic cytoskeletal element SHANK3 in sporadic Alzheimer’s disease (AD),” Frontiers in Neurology, vol. 10, p. 28, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  48. S. Ramakrishna and R. S. Muddashetty, “Emerging role of microRNAs in dementia,” Journal of Molecular Biology, vol. 431, no. 9, pp. 1743–1762, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  49. M. Manczak and P. H. Reddy, “RNA silencing of genes involved in Alzheimer’s disease enhances mitochondrial function and synaptic activity,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Basis of Disease, vol. 1832, no. 12, pp. 2368–2378, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  50. D. Lazic, A. P. Sagare, A. M. Nikolakopoulou, J. H. Griffin, R. Vassar, and B. V. Zlokovic, “3K3A-activated protein C blocks amyloidogenic BACE1 pathway and improves functional outcome in mice,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 216, no. 2, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  51. J. M. Long, B. Ray, and D. K. Lahiri, “MicroRNA-339-5p down-regulates protein expression of β-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1) in human primary brain cultures and is reduced in brain tissue specimens of Alzheimer disease subjects,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 289, no. 8, pp. 5184–5198, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  52. S. Higaki, M. Muramatsu, A. Matsuda et al., “Defensive effect of microRNA-200b/c against amyloid-beta peptide-induced toxicity in Alzheimer’s disease models,” PLoS One, vol. 13, no. 5, article e0196929, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  53. A. J. L. Macario and E. C. de Macario, “Sick chaperones, cellular stress, and disease,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 353, no. 14, pp. 1489–1501, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  54. P. Hammarström, R. L. Wiseman, E. T. Powers, and J. W. Kelly, “Prevention of transthyretin amyloid disease by changing protein misfolding energetics,” Science, vol. 299, no. 5607, pp. 713–716, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  55. S. Ayyadevara, M. Balasubramaniam, S. Kakraba, R. Alla, J. L. Mehta, and R. J. Shmookler Reis, “Aspirin-mediated acetylation protects against multiple neurodegenerative pathologies by impeding protein aggregation,” Antioxidants & Redox Signaling, vol. 27, no. 17, pp. 1383–1396, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  56. N. Azad, H. Rasoolijazi, M. T. Joghataie, and S. Soleimani, “Neuroprotective effects of carnosic acid in an experimental model of alzheimer's disease in rats,” Cell Journal, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 39–44, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  57. G. L. Semenza, “Pharmacologic targeting of hypoxia-inducible factors,” Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 379–403, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  58. J. Fallah and B. I. Rini, “HIF inhibitors: status of current clinical development,” Current Oncology Reports, vol. 21, no. 1, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  59. S. Ouyang, Y. H. Yao, Z. M. Zhang, J. S. Liu, and H. Xiang, “Curcumin inhibits hypoxia inducible factor-1α-induced inflammation and apoptosis in macrophages through an ERK dependent pathway,” European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 1816–1825, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  60. M. A. Russo, L. Sansone, I. Carnevale et al., “One special question to start with: can HIF/NFkB be a target in inflammation?” Endocrine, Metabolic & Immune Disorders Drug Targets, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 171–185, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  61. E. M. M. Quigley, “Microbiota-brain-gut axis and neurodegenerative diseases,” Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, vol. 17, no. 12, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  62. T. G. Dinan and J. F. Cryan, “The microbiome-gut-brain axis in health and disease,” Gastroenterology Clinics of North America, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 77–89, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  63. K. Kowalski and A. Mulak, “Brain-gut-microbiota axis in Alzheimer’s disease,” Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 48–60, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  64. N. Apetz, G. Munch, S. Govindaraghavan, and E. Gyengesi, “Natural compounds and plant extracts as therapeutics against chronic inflammation in Alzheimer’s disease - a translational perspective,” CNS & Neurological Disorders Drug Targets, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1175–1191, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  65. C. Iannuzzi, M. Borriello, G. Irace, M. Cammarota, A. Di Maro, and I. Sirangelo, “Vanillin affects amyloid aggregation and non-enzymatic glycation in human insulin,” Scientific Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, article 15086, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  66. B. Pucci, F. Bertani, M. Indelicato et al., “Insulin-like growth factor-1 inhibits STS-induced cell death and increases functional recovery of in vitro differentiated neurons,” Cell Cycle, vol. 7, no. 24, pp. 3869–3877, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  67. C. Ridler, “Exercise wards off Alzheimer disease by boosting neurogenesis and neuroprotective factors,” Nature Reviews Neurology, vol. 14, no. 11, p. 632, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  68. R. Papa and H. J. Lachmann, “Secondary, AA, Amyloidosis,” Rheumatic Diseases Clinics of North America, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 585–603, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  69. P. T. Lansbury and H. A. Lashuel, “A century-old debate on protein aggregation and neurodegeneration enters the clinic,” Nature, vol. 443, no. 7113, pp. 774–779, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  70. G. A. Tennent, L. B. Lovat, and M. B. Pepys, “Serum amyloid P component prevents proteolysis of the amyloid fibrils of Alzheimer disease and systemic amyloidosis,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 92, no. 10, pp. 4299–4303, 1995. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  71. G. G. Glenner, “Amyloid deposits and amyloidosis. The beta-fibrilloses (first of two parts),” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 302, no. 23, pp. 1283–1292, 1980. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  72. M. Vieira and M. J. Saraiva, “Transthyretin: a multifaceted protein,” Biomolecular Concepts, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 45–54, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  73. B. Frost and M. I. Diamond, “Prion-like mechanisms in neurodegenerative diseases,” Nature Reviews Neuroscience, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 155–159, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  74. S. Mörner, U. Hellman, O. B. Suhr, E. Kazzam, and A. Waldenström, “Amyloid heart disease mimicking hypertrophic cardiomyopathy,” Journal of Internal Medicine, vol. 258, no. 3, pp. 225–230, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  75. C. J. G. de Almeida, L. B. Chiarini, J. P. da Silva, P. M. R. e Silva, M. A. Martins, and R. Linden, “The cellular prion protein modulates phagocytosis and inflammatory response,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 238–246, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  76. D. T. Stephenson, K. Rash, and J. A. Clemens, “Amyloid precursor protein accumulates in regions of neurodegeneration following focal cerebral ischemia in the rat,” Brain Research, vol. 593, no. 1, pp. 128–135, 1992. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2019 Matteo A. Russo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Related articles

No related content is available yet for this article.
 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

No related content is available yet for this article.

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.